There are several Collie heads out there, but overall, I really like Ptd. Spiritwind Sangria. I love her structure and her head. I also really like Ch. Byluc's Speak of the Devil. Sorry, I didn't want to hotlink, and I can't add pictures from my phone.

I really, really dislike the Collie heads in Europe. Maybe they are the Russian ones someone else was mentioning. They have dished faces, and gigantic amounts of hair. Just don't like them at all.

I noticed on Shelties there seems to be so many different faces, and it varies by line. I have no idea what is 'correct' for them. But I have oneos that I find attractive. I'm afraid to post their names because now that I look that them, I see that the more Collie the head is (or at least ny preference in Collie heads) the more I like the Sheltie

The one thing I did notice is that Sheltie's seem to be extremely fine boned. Is that how it is supposed to be? Some of them seemed like if you blew on them they would snap in half.

Also? I REALLY HATE the amount of hair on an American Cocker. There is no way that hair would not get tangled in the field. Unless they changed the standard, I am almost 90% sure that it said that the coat should not be excessive. This is in no way a moderately coated dog.

__________________
Addie - Bi-Black Sheltie. 11/26/14.

A bird does not sing because it has an answer. It sings because it has a song. - Chinese Proverb

The great pleasure of a dog is that you may make a fool of yourself with him and not only will he not scold you, but he will make a fool of himself too." - Samuel Butler

Also? I REALLY HATE the amount of hair on an American Cocker. There is no way that hair would not get tangled in the field. Unless they changed the standard, I am almost 90% sure that it said that the coat should not be excessive. This is in no way a moderately coated dog.

I agree. I don't like that the spaniels as a whole have tended towards big exaggerated coats, when most of the standards call for "moderate".

I think the OP was generally asking what about the dog(s) in the show ring does not conform to standard, right?

For me, I puzzle that the AmStaff standard clearly states that uncropped ears are preferred to cropped, but I have no doubt a cropped dog will be in Group tonight, and if I watched BIB, almost (if not) all will have cropped ears as well. I've known several people who had UKC pit bulls and/or AKC AmStaffs they intended to show, and everyone told them if they wanted to have a shot, they had to have their ears done. So much for the standard.

I think there's always going to be a huge issue with the difference in coat between show-bred and field-bred dogs - sporting breeds like spaniels and setters especially.

I generally prefer the look of breeds a hundred years ago, before there was such a huge split in type. I'd take one of Albert Payson Terhune's collies any day, but I really have very little interest in the collies in the show ring.

For me, I puzzle that the AmStaff standard clearly states that uncropped ears are preferred to cropped, but I have no doubt a cropped dog will be in Group tonight, and if I watched BIB, almost (if not) all will have cropped ears as well. I've known several people who had UKC pit bulls and/or AKC AmStaffs they intended to show, and everyone told them if they wanted to have a shot, they had to have their ears done. So much for the standard.

That's because while the standard says natural preferred, they have to be correct natural ears. The vast majority of Amstaffs wouldn't have correct natural ears because breeders don't breed for them since 95% of people crop. Not worth the risk for most people.

That's because while the standard says natural preferred, they have to be correct natural ears. The vast majority of Amstaffs wouldn't have correct natural ears because breeders don't breed for them since 95% of people crop. Not worth the risk for most people.

That and, a well done crop looks amazing. I'm a little biased though

Yeah, I do understand that cropping negates the need for correct ear set, and since ears need to be cropped before a certain age, it's hard to know for sure if the ears are going to end up setting nicely, so cropping is the safer route. I do get it, but I can't help but feel it's cheating. I think a well done crop looks amazing, too, although I'm really fond of rose ears. Reasons aside, I think it's a great example for the original question lol.

Honestly, I think a lot of heavily coated breeds are flipping off their standard in favor of flashy winning dogs.

American Cocker:

Quote:

On the head, short and fine; on the body, medium length, with enough undercoating to give protection. The ears, chest, abdomen and legs are well feathered, but not so excessively as to hide the Cocker Spaniel's true lines and movement or affect his appearance and function as a moderately coated sporting dog. The texture is most important. The coat is silky, flat or slightly wavy and of a texture which permits easy care. Excessive coat or curly or cottony textured coat shall be severely penalized. Use of electric clippers on the back coat is not desirable. Trimming to enhance the dog's true lines should be done to appear as natural as possible.

Old English Sheepdog:

Quote:

A strong, compact, square, balanced dog. Taking him all around, he is profusely, but not excessively coated , thickset, muscular and able-bodied. These qualities, combined with his agility, fit him for the demanding tasks required of a shepherd's or drover's dog. Therefore, soundness is of the greatest importance. His bark is loud with a distinctive "pot-casse" ring in it.

(...)

Profuse, but not so excessive as to give the impression of the dog being overly fat, and of a good hard texture; not straight, but shaggy and free from curl. Quality and texture of coat to be considered above mere profuseness.

Bearded Collie:

Quote:

The coat is double with the undercoat soft, furry and close. The outercoat is flat, harsh, strong and shaggy, free from wooliness and curl, although a slight wave is permissible. The coat falls naturally to either side but must never be artificially parted. The length and density of the hair are sufficient to provide a protective coat and to enhance the shape of the dog, but not so profuse as to obscure the natural lines of the body. The dog should be shown as naturally as is consistent with good grooming but the coat must not be trimmed in any way. On the head, the bridge of the nose is sparsely covered with hair which is slightly longer on the sides to cover the lips. From the cheeks, the lower lips and under the chin, the coat increases in length towards the chest, forming the typical beard. An excessively long, silky coat or one which has been trimmed in any way must be severely penalized.

Pekingese:

Quote:

Coat - It is a long, coarse-textured, straight, stand-off outer coat, with thick, soft undercoat. The coat forms a noticeable mane on the neck and shoulder area with the coat on the remainder of the body somewhat shorter in length. A long and profuse coat is desirable providing it does not obscure the shape of the body. Long feathering is found on toes, backs of the thighs and forelegs, with longer fringing on the ears and tail. Presentation - Presentation should accentuate the natural outline of the Pekingese. Any obvious trimming or sculpting of the coat, detracting from its natural appearance, should be severely penalized.

etc, etc.

In Brittanys, there are some dogs that are really waify, like if the wind was strong enough they might get blown away. The standard says this:

Quote:

Substance--Not too light in bone, yet never heavy-boned and cumbersome.

I don't care for this look, although I think it is technically within standard:

I much prefer a dog like this:

Still obviously athletic and agile, but with a little more substance. Personal preference though I guess. I actually tend toward the more strictly field bred dogs aesthetically, but that's definitely personal preference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kady05

That's because while the standard says natural preferred, they have to be correct natural ears. The vast majority of Amstaffs wouldn't have correct natural ears because breeders don't breed for them since 95% of people crop. Not worth the risk for most people.

That and, a well done crop looks amazing. I'm a little biased though

But shouldn't breeders at least be trying to breed for decent ears, since the standard specifically states that uncropped is preferred? Cropping because ears are crappy seems like a cop out.

There are several Collie heads out there, but overall, I really like Ptd. Spiritwind Sangria. I love her structure and her head. I also really like Ch. Byluc's Speak of the Devil. Sorry, I didn't want to hotlink, and I can't add pictures from my phone.

I really, really dislike the Collie heads in Europe. Maybe they are the Russian ones someone else was mentioning. They have dished faces, and gigantic amounts of hair. Just don't like them at all.

Thisssss. I don't care for.

Thus far I am happy with Shelby. She doesn't have much coat thus far (not a show quality coat) which doesn't bother me at all. She's pretty moderate overall. Larger eyes, her head is refined but not extremely narrow.

But shouldn't breeders at least be trying to breed for decent ears, since the standard specifically states that uncropped is preferred? Cropping because ears are crappy seems like a cop out.

Yes and no. If ears are the only thing wrong in your breed, by all means breed for ears and count yourself lucky. But usually there are more pressing matters. In my breed, most dogs have CEA to some degree. Most dogs are MDR1 mutants. There are also other genetic health issues in the breed, in addition to structure and all that fun stuff. Those, to me, are more important than having perfect naturally tipped ears (and ears are a BIG DEAL in my breed. Most collies, at least in the US, have their ears taped and/or glued at some point, and some people apparently think it's cruel. WTF. Those are the same people who breed houndy-looking ugly-headed European collies, though, too.)